Matt Lohry

This actually appears to be a deck plate girder with timber approaches.

I’ve seen very large culverts and very small arches, so I don’t think the difference is related to size—I think the difference is in the construction—culverts are place-and-fill, where the entire structure (round or rectangular, metal or concrete) is dropped into place and filled over the top. Arches are built up like bridges. Even though corrugated steel was used, this to me is built up as a bridge, and qualifies as an arch.

Apparently this road has been closed for only a couple of years...it's amazing how little time it takes for a road to look like it's been abandoned for a century after it closes.

I wish I were closer to here--there is what appears to be a very old Pratt truss footbridge over the canal about a half-mile north of this location. Lat/Long coords:

43.134748° -75.674952°

Canal St. streetview shows a good view of the east end.

The bridge in the postcard photo is probably the pre-1939 bridge. It looks markedly different than the current one.

I don’t see any steel stringers—It looks like the original floor system is still in place and it still functions as a truss, which is good news; however, a center bent support was added at some point to help increase load capacity.

I stopped to see this bridge earlier today, and I wish I hadn’t. It’s a truly heartbreaking sight. Damage is far worse than I imagined. It would take a miracle worker to fix this one :’(

Just can’t keep the political crap out of this, can you!? And, as always, too YELLOW to put your real name with your asinine comment! Political whining is what Facebook is for, not Bridgehunter.

I believe they’re “French” drains, likely installed because the road surface under the bridge is at a low point. A French drain is just a grate with gravel or other soil underneath that water can pass through to the ground water table. This drain type doesn’t require any plumbing to carry water away.

It looks like there actually is some exposed rebar at the very top of Photo #11, indicating a concrete bridge.

Looks like Anonymous is going crazy and arguing with him(her)self...

The arson reports first surfaced on the American Society of Civil Engineers website, which is otherwise perfectly legitimate, so to me there was all the reason in the world to take the story as legitimate. If it were Wikipedia, Pinterest, Facebook, or other similar social media outlets, then there would be more reason for scrutiny, but given the circumstances I cannot fault Amanda for taking the story as truth. At least we all know what’s going on now!

Hi Amanda, I’m certainly not trying to create schism on this website, and to the bridge’s credit it is a truss, but the positives end there....this is a common, bland, Wal-mart inspired, mail-order bridge that is found in many, many parks across the country. They have used this bridge type in at least one location in my state of Wisconsin to replace an actual historic (and beautiful) truss bridge that was not in the way of anything and was in great shape, which is senseless and destructive. In this case, thankfully, they didn’t replace an historic bridge, but they could have used an actual historic bridge here instead of this, which would have enhanced this area and preserved a piece of history. With New York City’s commendable preservation record, I’m actually surprised that they went this route here.

I think they gave it that name because it’s so painfully ugly that when you walk across it you’d swear you were walking into hell.

The 2015 bridge is built over Bronx Kill and is built through the arched supports for this bridge:

http://bridgehunter.com/ny/new-york/amtrak---bronx-kill/

The Othmar Amman bridge is the blue lift footbridge that Luke referenced before.

The bridge in the photo is built over Little Hell Gate and was built in 2003. If you go to google earth to this bridge and use the clock function, you will see that the bridge appears in the August 2003 frame.